Feminist Kiwis (not a honeypot)

[BOLDYSPICY!]

I'm of the Rebecca West type of feminist:
"I myself have never been able to find out what feminism is; I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat or a prostitute."

However, I don't think MRAs give a shit about "men's rights". They're just butthurt incels trying convince everyone that it's women's fault that they suck.

Am I the only one who uses the word "feminist" to mean "a person who has studied feminist doctrine and engages in activism based on those principles"?

Also I like the part where y'all think "egalitarian" isn't a loaded word nowadays.

Because "reblogging on tumblr" is totally what I meant by "activism". Sure.


Yes. This is one of the biggest mistakes by people unfamiliar with feminism; they think feminism is one big homogenous blob instead of a variety of viewpoints with a similar goal (equality/liberation for women). This is why people express confusion and ridicule at supposed feminist hypocrisy, because they think it's the same people saying "men should die!" right after "I love being a slut!"

I really don't think anyone is a feminist who doesn't do the research and the work. Even I'm not a feminist since I'm not doing any sort of activism. You can agree with certain feminist viewpoints, but that isn't the same thing. It's like saying you're a musician without making music or knowing anything about music, but you just like music. Or saying you're a Democrat when you don't know what the politicians believe because you don't even vote.

(And that's not even getting into the problems between people I would consider "real" Feminists.)

Hear, hear. I'll drink to that.

 

[Psycho]

Am I the only one who uses the word "feminist" to mean "a person who has studied feminist doctrine and engages in activism based on those principles"?

What are he principles of feminist doctrine that you live by and what kind of activsm do you do?

 

[Andy27]

Because "reblogging on tumblr" is totally what I meant by "activism". Sure.
Yes. This is one of the biggest mistakes by people unfamiliar with feminism; they think feminism is one big homogenous blob instead of a variety of viewpoints with a similar goal (equality/liberation for women).

Meh. With the exception of the differences between first wave and the latter waves of feminism, there isn't really a lot of substantial variety between feminist ideologies. Any differences are usually superficial or "procedural" but they all (again, not counting first wave) follow certain principles that restrict feminism as an ideology to specific paths.

 

[PeteyCoffee]

Unfortunately, I think a fair amount of MRA hate stems from a knee-jerk reaction against the fact that the more extreme members of the movement essentially want to put women "back in the kitchen" and redefine the female identity solely on the basis of wife/motherhood, just as the common knee-jerk reaction to feminism is that it wants to destroy men. Of course, both these reactions are grounded in a kernel of truth - idiots on the extreme fringes of both movements seem to want exactly that to happen - and the more sensible, moderate elements in both movements get drowned out by the idiocy.

By 'moderate feminists' do you mean individuals who consider themselves feminists but do not identify with the political faction?

 

[KingQueen]

What are he principles of feminist doctrine that you live by and what kind of activsm do you do?

I sort of answered this: I don't consider myself a feminist because I don't do jack shit. I've read a variety of stuff and am sympathetic towards some of it. If time/health allowed I'd maybe do more.

I think the distinction is important to make because otherwise you get people who know nothing and do nothing talking really loud about what other folks should do. Seems dumb.

Meh. With the exception of the differences between first wave and the latter waves of feminism, there isn't really a lot of substantial variety between feminist ideologies. Any differences are usually superficial or "procedural" but they all (again, not counting first wave) follow certain principles that restrict feminism as an ideology to specific paths.

I completely disagree. Some of the differences are indeed procedural, but those are not superficial and have a huge effect on policy and action-taking. But for ideology, there is a world of difference between, for example, the idea that femininity is a self-damaging learned behavior versus femininity as an innate essence of body or spirit.

I find all of the disproportionate hate MRAs get compared to feminists hilarious when they're practically the same thing.

Keyboard warriors are the same thing no matter their politics. Actual activists are not.

Also "disproportionate hate" is laughable. MRAs get tweets that say "die cis scum". How awful for them.

 

[QI 541]

Also "disproportionate hate" is laughable. MRAs get tweets that say "die cis scum". How awful for them.

This entire thread is "Please don't judge all feminists by some crazies. But all MRAs are loveshy misogynists."

 

[KingQueen]

I don't think it was implied that MRAs face hate speech or hate crimes, just a lot of negative sentiment.

I thought it was implied that feminists don't get backlash, or rather no backlash that matters. If I misunderstood I apologize.

(I just woke up so I probably sound like an asshole. Apologies I really think Feminism benefits everyone, including men, when applied correctly. Just so I'm being clear on my position.)

 

[cumrobbery]

Feminism!

 

[Trombonista]

I still use the term "feminist" because I think the core issues are still important. Yeah it's unfortunate that the crazies over the years have tainted the word to most people but I still don't think it's a good reason to abandon the term completely.

I'm the same way. It's like what Michael Bolton from Office Space said about changing his name to Mike: Why should I change it? They're (the SJWs) the ones who suck.

That being said, I don't really care if other people call themselves egalitarian or whatever, I just refuse to drop the feminist label.

 

[TheProdigalStunna]

This entire thread is "Please don't judge all feminists by some crazies. But all MRAs are loveshy misogynists."

cuz its true

 

[Vitriol]

Getting a little off topic. If you want to discuss the burgeoning MRA movement please create a new thread.

i warned that i wanted this thread to stay on topic and any further discussion of mra's to go in a separate thread. Locking the thread while I create an OP for an MRA thread and do some thread cleaning.

Edited to merge my now double post and to unlock the thread.

 

[Techpriest]

Honestly the current wave of feminism needs to die in a fire, it has become a meaningless and hypocritical movement that claims to be for equality for all yet ignores bigger issues in favor of pointless bullshit. I'm sick of all the lying for pity, telling me I'm a potential rapist for being a straight male and should feel bad about it, and also in just how holier than thou they keep fucking act. It's like the movement is becoming generations version of the crazy moralists trying to fight the culture wars for Jesus.

The movement needs to size down and refocus on getting inroads into the third world rather than complaining about micro aggressions and other bullshit issues in the first world.

 

[Jaimas]

Honestly the current wave of feminism needs to die in a fire, it has become a meaningless and hypocritical movement that claims to be for equality for all yet ignores bigger issues in favor of pointless bullshit. I'm sick of all the lying for pity, telling me I'm a potential rapist for being a straight male and should feel bad about it, and also in just how holier than thou they keep fucking act. It's like the movement is becoming generations version of the crazy moralists trying to fight the culture wars for Jesus.

The movement needs to size down and refocus on getting inroads into the third world rather than complaining about micro aggressions and other bullshit issues in the first world.

The part that's a tragedy is that so many wind up in it due to false pretenses. They legit want to help, they want to do good, and they wind up manipulated by these ridiculous assbags. Let us all pause a moment and remember the 16-year-old who was told to doxx and harass a guy for having an opinion contrary to her own if she wanted to be a good feminist. This kid probably didn't mean to cause any harm, but she wound up so whipped up by them that she went and did something like this.

It's the same kind of shit we saw with Vade's internet-based version of stochastic harassment, where she'd stir her followers up into a self-righteous frenzy, get them to attack someone she didn't like, and if they overstepped or it was traced back to her, she'd deny culpability entirely. Pretty much the entirety of the "movement" of Social Justice is like this, with a few ideologues stoking the fire as well-meaning but misguided individuals are dragged along for the ride. Disagree with them? You're a racist/rapist/bigot/shitlord/insert term here.

But the thing is - each time we see something like this, it's a teachable moment. People are waking up and seeing this for what it is.

And the key thing they're realizing, perhaps most importantly of all, is thus:

This isn't about feminism. Not really.

These people claim it is, but they do so solely to deflect criticism. It's not coincidence that the self-proclaimed leaders of this crazy shortbus are all, almost to a man, as oppressive as what they claim to oppose - they claim to be part of it solely because it wins them easy victories, and enables them to play the privilege/oppression card. They fucking co-opted that term - the same way that so many other groups with similar agendas co-opted other things that were otherwise good. It's happened to both political parties throughout history and it'll happen again long after we are all dead. Our parents and their parents fought these same shitheels at different points in history, from the moral majority to book censors to the people claiming the Jazz was going to send your soul to El Diablo. And because people project what is truest about themselves, we can see that they claim other groups, similarly diverse are monolithic opponents of everything they hold dear (because it's what they're trying to do).

It's all about control and the pathological need to say what's good or bad, and in this regard, they're just the latest wave of a recurring nemesis that our forebears mocked the same way we do.

And because of that, take heart, Kiwis: These assholes will lose, every single time.

 

[PeteyCoffee]

Do you think feminists just stormed in one day, staged a coup, and started passing laws? The reason they managed to create change in the first place is that activists gradually swayed public opinion in favor of certain reforms.

The dumb rating was because I feel you are repeating a lie which contemporary political feminists, who advocate for totalistic and sexually discriminatory laws, tell in order to justify that they're above other people and therefore righteous anyways.

I disagree because in my opinion social movements are a byproduct of public opinion, not the other way around. Cultural advancement is part of the natural ebb and flow of life which results from changing individual life circumstances. Individuals make conclusions themselves when the time is right or if it is personally expedient. Progress does not depend on any organization telling people what they should think. If what the organization has to say isn't personally expedient, a person doesn't want to hear it. If what the organization has to say is personally expedient, a person already came to that conclusion.

The Feminists had absolutely nothing to do with the social change, and I say the same thing of any group which has ever been given credit for such a thing. Feminism was a political faction, a result of the new way of thinking, and a part of the natural progression. This is just the way I see it.

I should make it clear that every time I've mentioned "Feminism" or "Feminists", I was referring to the contemporary political faction. My view (based on what I've seen all over the Internet) was that most people who considered themselves "moderate feminists" identified with the political faction to some extent.

Perhaps I was mistaken all along: most of these loudmouths who call themselves "moderates" (not here, I mean across the Internet) are in actuality the extremists. The truth is that "moderate feminism" has absolutely nothing to do with that political faction.

Am I or am I not finally getting it?

 

[Meowthkip]

I should make it clear that every time I've mentioned "Feminism" or "Feminists", I was referring to the contemporary political faction. My view (based on what I've seen all over the Internet) was that most people who considered themselves "moderate feminists" identified with the political faction to some extent.

Perhaps I was mistaken all along: most of these loudmouths who call themselves "moderates" (not here, I mean across the Internet) are in actuality the extremists. The truth is that "moderate feminism" has absolutely nothing to do with that political faction.

Am I or am I not finally getting it?

There's multiple contemporary factions, or "waves." You seem to be talking about third-wave feminists.

Perhaps you should actually do some research so you know what the hell you're talking about.

 

[Sanae Kochiya]

My view (based on what I've seen all over the Internet)

I encourage you to cite your sources, because the Internet is simultaneously the most and least reliable source of information available.

 

[Andy27]

I completely disagree. Some of the differences are indeed procedural, but those are not superficial and have a huge effect on policy and action-taking. But for ideology, there is a world of difference between, for example, the idea that femininity is a self-damaging learned behavior versus femininity as an innate essence of body or spirit.

Fair enough but my point is that whatever diversity different feminist ideological strands have exists within a narrow ideological spectrum adhering to specific parameters, namely that:
1) It allows for, encourages and even demands excessive social engineering, almost always (if not always) including by the government
2) It presupposes that gender equality is achieved by prioritizing and adopting a woman-centric approach (not in the sense of necessarily focusing on women but in the sense of always adopting a woman's (general "woman's") point of view as more important / truthful)

(1) alone disqualifies any "right-wing" ideologies from feminism. Most people belonging to (other) far-leftist ideologies (communists, anarchists) would also be disqualified since they would mostly see the issues raised as unimportant in the grand scheme of things. And from the rest (centre-left and left-wing), only a certain amount of people would accept (2) as true

From the viewpoint of someone who disagrees with both (1) and (2), differences between feminist ideologies aren't really that important, it's the same thing with different "dressing"

(Again, the above does not include First-Wave Feminism into the definition of Feminism)

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

I used to run under that title when it meant "equality" and I would deny the misandrists who called themselves feminists or feminazis as they used to be called. Then there were the people opposed to feminism who absolutely insisted that those people were the only ones worthy of being called feminists & anyone less extreme than that didn't count.

I could not hold back the tide of autistic rage that was this movement & had to abandon ship.

 

[PeteyCoffee]

There's multiple contemporary factions, or "waves." You seem to be talking about third-wave feminists.

Perhaps you should actually do some research so you know what the hell you're talking about.

Are you telling me the majority of feminists would denounce Sarkeesian? Because I've rarely if ever seen that happen. In fact, most of the feminists I've read or talked to outside of this forum have expressed solidarity with the same totalistic views I have a serious problem with, usually somewhat modestly, but that's still being an advocate.

I am honestly skeptical that most contemporary feminists aren't like that. It's hard for me to buy that a minority has this much of a voice above all the others. I mean, I get that the media backs this so called minority. But that doesn't explain decentralized places like tumblr, which appear almost unanimously in support of the mainstream variation of "feminism".

Admittedly, I never was an avid tumblr user, so perhaps my perspective on it is simply inaccurate. All I know is most of the time I've gone there the people reposting porn were also reposting SJW bullshit, and it seriously got in the way.

I encourage you to cite your sources, because the Internet is simultaneously the most and least reliable source of information available.

Admittedly, I have no sources. It's just the vibe I've gotten from most of the feminists I've read or talked to over the years.

Could you link me one popular feminist who does not advocate for any of the following: censorship, slut-shaming, legal discrimination between the sexes, literal segregation, the idea that women are weak and need to be treated differently, the idea that men are repressed rapists, etc? I mean, I'm sure there are some, it's just that I personally have never come across one. And I don't know if that's because the majority of contemporary feminists are crazy or if that's because I've only visited fringe online feminist communities and talked to SJW college students.

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

Admittedly, I have no sources. It's just the vibe I've gotten from most of the feminists I've read or talked to over the years.

Could you link me one popular feminist who does not advocate for any of the following: censorship, slut-shaming, legal discrimination between the sexes, literal segregation, the idea that women are weak and need to be treated differently, the idea that men are repressed rapists, etc? I mean, I'm sure there are some, it's just that I personally have never come across one. And I don't know if that's because the majority of contemporary feminists are crazy or if that's because I've only visited fringe online feminist communities and talked to SJW college students.

I would like to say "vocal minority" but that's rather optimistic.